This bit of news today feels like an actual Frogurt situation. The in-developmental hell Masters of the Universe movie has a new writer, Terry Rossio (as revealed per The Hollywood Reporter). He joins a long list of other writers trying to bring life to a movie that now has no director. Jon Chu, who was once attached to direct the project has now dropped out, no doubt to direct G.I. Joe 3.

It's obvious to this reporter Chu probably came to the realization that there would be no way he could ever top the original live-action Masters of the Universe (1989). So he dropped out. It's a realization many whom been attached to this project have come too. How can you truly top cinema-pefection such as this:

This bit of news today feels like an actual Frogurt situation. The in-developmental hell Masters of the Universe movie has a new writer, Terry Rossio (as revealed per The Hollywood Reporter). He joins a long list of other writers trying to bring life to a movie that now has no director. Jon Chu, who was once attached to direct the project has now dropped out, no doubt to direct G.I. Joe 3.

It's obvious to this reporter Chu probably came to the realization that there would be no way he could ever top the original live-action Masters of the Universe (1989). So he dropped out. It's a realization many whom been attached to this project have come too. How can you truly top cinema-pefection such as this:

DANG!

You know Chu could have actually tried to do a real Masters of the Universe movie, instead of the original, which was really a Jack Kirby Fourth World movie wrapped in a MotU blanket.

"I have my heroes, but no one knows their names"- Sons of the Desert

Strict31 wrote:I'm not sure that combining the nigh-uncontrollable power of LOLtron with the Nacireman is a good idea. Some years from now, when mankind is on the verge of extinction, we'll be able to look back and remember this moment, and say, "DANG."

Outhouse Editor

Juan Cena wrote:You know Chu could have actually tried to do a real Masters of the Universe movie, instead of the original, which was really a Jack Kirby Fourth World movie wrapped in a MotU blanket.

We will never have a Jack Kirby Fourth World movie. The '89 movie was the best we'll ever get. You know what I say to be true. It'll also be the best version of Skeletor and He-Man. The casting will never be as ever aligned as they were then.

Outhouse Editor

Juan Cena wrote:You know Chu could have actually tried to do a real Masters of the Universe movie, instead of the original, which was really a Jack Kirby Fourth World movie wrapped in a MotU blanket.

We will never have a Jack Kirby Fourth World movie. The '89 movie was the best we'll ever get. You know what I say to be true. It'll also be the best version of Skeletor and He-Man. The casting will never be as ever aligned as they were then.

sdsichero wrote:I especially like and admire Zechs. He's everything I wish I could be!

Motherfucker from Hell

Draco x wrote:So by hiring the wrong writer are they secretly hoping this movie bombs or something whenever it ever comes out?

Firstly, I don't know that he's the "wrong writer". Yes, he's been attached to some movies that may not have been great, but there are several of them were commercial successes (the first Pirates of the Caribbean, Aladdin, Shrek...none of the sequels, I noted).

Second, how many movies only have one writer? Furthermore, they're always going to deal with directors, executives, and sometimes even actors insisting on their own ideas making it into the film, regardless of if it makes sense or fits the narrative.

Third, a friend of mine mentioned some time ago that studios can tell if a movie is going to bomb before they release it; the example he used was Green Lantern. According to him, they'll screen the movie, fully aware of how bad it is, and send it to nationwide theatres anyway. Why? I'm not sure. One theory I have is that, depending on the property, they probably know there's an eager fanbase waiting and willing to see the film just to see it. And/Or, it's a way to recoup what they spent on MAKING the film on the first place. After all, if you spend $10 million making a movie, but you project making only $5 million releasing it, isn't making half back better than nothing from not releasing it?

I'm not saying Roccio is the perfect choice, or that I like/have seen all the movies he's worked on. I'm just saying that he doesn't seem to be so consistently bad that it means he's the sole reason a MotU flick will/could fail.

Motherfucker from Hell

Draco x wrote:So by hiring the wrong writer are they secretly hoping this movie bombs or something whenever it ever comes out?

Firstly, I don't know that he's the "wrong writer". Yes, he's been attached to some movies that may not have been great, but there are several of them were commercial successes (the first Pirates of the Caribbean, Aladdin, Shrek...none of the sequels, I noted).

Second, how many movies only have one writer? Furthermore, they're always going to deal with directors, executives, and sometimes even actors insisting on their own ideas making it into the film, regardless of if it makes sense or fits the narrative.

Third, a friend of mine mentioned some time ago that studios can tell if a movie is going to bomb before they release it; the example he used was Green Lantern. According to him, they'll screen the movie, fully aware of how bad it is, and send it to nationwide theatres anyway. Why? I'm not sure. One theory I have is that, depending on the property, they probably know there's an eager fanbase waiting and willing to see the film just to see it. And/Or, it's a way to recoup what they spent on MAKING the film on the first place. After all, if you spend $10 million making a movie, but you project making only $5 million releasing it, isn't making half back better than nothing from not releasing it?

I'm not saying Roccio is the perfect choice, or that I like/have seen all the movies he's worked on. I'm just saying that he doesn't seem to be so consistently bad that it means he's the sole reason a MotU flick will/could fail.

Fagorstorm

SporkBot wrote:Firstly, I don't know that he's the "wrong writer". Yes, he's been attached to some movies that may not have been great, but there are several of them were commercial successes (the first Pirates of the Caribbean, Aladdin, Shrek...none of the sequels, I noted).

Second, how many movies only have one writer? Furthermore, they're always going to deal with directors, executives, and sometimes even actors insisting on their own ideas making it into the film, regardless of if it makes sense or fits the narrative.

Third, a friend of mine mentioned some time ago that studios can tell if a movie is going to bomb before they release it; the example he used was Green Lantern. According to him, they'll screen the movie, fully aware of how bad it is, and send it to nationwide theatres anyway. Why? I'm not sure. One theory I have is that, depending on the property, they probably know there's an eager fanbase waiting and willing to see the film just to see it. And/Or, it's a way to recoup what they spent on MAKING the film on the first place. After all, if you spend $10 million making a movie, but you project making only $5 million releasing it, isn't making half back better than nothing from not releasing it?

I'm not saying Roccio is the perfect choice, or that I like/have seen all the movies he's worked on. I'm just saying that he doesn't seem to be so consistently bad that it means he's the sole reason a MotU flick will/could fail.

Fagorstorm

SporkBot wrote:Firstly, I don't know that he's the "wrong writer". Yes, he's been attached to some movies that may not have been great, but there are several of them were commercial successes (the first Pirates of the Caribbean, Aladdin, Shrek...none of the sequels, I noted).

Second, how many movies only have one writer? Furthermore, they're always going to deal with directors, executives, and sometimes even actors insisting on their own ideas making it into the film, regardless of if it makes sense or fits the narrative.

Third, a friend of mine mentioned some time ago that studios can tell if a movie is going to bomb before they release it; the example he used was Green Lantern. According to him, they'll screen the movie, fully aware of how bad it is, and send it to nationwide theatres anyway. Why? I'm not sure. One theory I have is that, depending on the property, they probably know there's an eager fanbase waiting and willing to see the film just to see it. And/Or, it's a way to recoup what they spent on MAKING the film on the first place. After all, if you spend $10 million making a movie, but you project making only $5 million releasing it, isn't making half back better than nothing from not releasing it?

I'm not saying Roccio is the perfect choice, or that I like/have seen all the movies he's worked on. I'm just saying that he doesn't seem to be so consistently bad that it means he's the sole reason a MotU flick will/could fail.